Regime Change and the Future of Liberalism | Patrick Deneen, JD Vance Kevin Roberts & Christine Emba

From the Modern Age Panel on the Future of Liberalism.
Deneen and special guests Senator JD Vance, Christine Emba, and Kevin Roberts as they respond to Patrick’s argument and discuss strategies for building a virtuous leadership class committed to the common good. The conversation will be moderated by ISI’s own, Dan McCarthy.
Become a Member:
isi.org/join-community/
Support ISI:
isi.org/donate/
Upcoming ISI Events:
isi.org/events/

[@LawGarithmic]

Great stuff from Deneen, refreshing to hear an actual conservative for once. The libertarian death grip on the party needs to be broken.

[@rickvinson8324]

You have no idea what you, or any at these forum, are talking about. The Republican party is, for the most part, liberal. It has never been in any sense libertarian, if you are judging it by those that win the elections and run the party apparatus. Fortunately you natcons are like libertarians in that you are too few and too weak to matter, so you're going nowhere.

[@redcatofdeath]

Deneen is a radical leftist. He loves state power and looks back to a mythical golden age which shapes his hopes for a utopia in the present age, rather like radical environmentalists.

[@redcatofdeath]

Of course, libertarians have also almost never had any purchase on the Republican party.

[@Scynthescizor]

@@redcatofdeath At the ground-level, they absolutely have. The average "conservative" believes most libertarian platitudes, with slight modifications: small government, free markets, the primacy of the individual, and a skepticism of all collective political action.

[@noahboughdy2648]

Always love hearing JD Vance speak about the threat of state and private power’s fusion. It breaks through the libertarianism that has left the GOP effete in the face of today’s challenges.

[@kinghenry100]

JD is very impressive

[@jsong8282]

Thanks for this conversation

[@padraigtakahashi7498]

Brilliant stuff.

[@christopherclayton8577]

Re the introduction from Louise- from resisting revolution from abroad, to the need to resist domestic revolution. It's an age-old problem: as Hannah Arendt once observed, you become what you fight. Unfortunately.

[@walterclaycooke]

So to achieve order we have to first have maximum disorder

[@JC-qh6wl]

Deneen’s talk would have been great if he didn’t try to paint a wining and dining bourgeoisie come to political prominence as an aristocracy with aristocratic tastes. As far as I know, neither the Roman senate nor the aristocracy of the Middle Ages ever cared much for trendy restaurants or university degrees.

[@ZephaniahL]

One of these folx is not like the other. One of these folx is just not the same.

[@Scynthescizor]

Do you mean the heritage foundation guy or the black lady?

[@landsea7332]

@@Scynthescizor One of these folks is not like the others : answer the heritage foundation guy . 1:09:53 The interesting part occurs when Patrick Deneen starts talking freely. He advocates for a return of government regulated economics ( aka Keynesian Economics ) Recall , Reagan is the poster boy for bringing in a crony version of neo liberal economics , which was followed by Bush Sr , Clinton , Bush Jr and Obama . Then Deneen describes how wokeism is " The wedding between progressive interest of capital , and the progressive interest of the social revolutionaries ... at a time of a visible inequality ... when ordinary people are feeling incapable of achieving basic goods of life . " . He continues by saying the elites are using the language of egalitarianism in order to govern . .

[@Madstsone]

Dan McCarthy sounds just like William Daniels.

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

You listed a supposed breakdown of traditional norms in nearly perfect right wing language, then say framing that list (marriage, abortion, transgender etc) in a negative light is not right wing, and defend that by listing tariffs, economy and jobs. You may giggle, but if you understood your own rhetoric in the political reality we live in now you might reconsider.

[@marcuscrassus5229]

He's not arguing that his ideas are not right wing, he just means that under the influence of fusionism and neoconservatism, people have falsely identified classical liberal ideas as 'on the right' and anything that opposes them as 'socialist' or 'leftist'.

[@jimmyjames417]

He's going to say we need the Ancien Regime

[@ramon2008]

Explain

[@aaronroston5741]

That was a waste of two hours

[@Noitartst]

Yeah--buzz words and shiboleths--talking suits, trying to sell...what? You tell me.

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

I have to say I feel your presentation of the value of going back centuries in rights for women and gay people is one of the most dangerous I have heard from academia.

[@LawGarithmic]

Not sure what lecture you watched but he didn't say that. Lol

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

@@LawGarithmic @35: - 36: he lists divorce, abortion, sex used for other than procreation and transgender people as negatives as harmful as public pornography.

[@bodbn]

They are. They are destroying this country. Whatever comes after liberalism will have to find a compromise on these issues.

[@marcuscrassus5229]

Have you read his book, 'Why liberalism failed'? His thought is contiguous with an intellectual tradition spanning from Plato and Aristotle all the way to de Maistre, Burke, de Jouvenel, the realist, even the Kantian tradition. If you feel that his ideas are most dangerous, you must either be completely unaware of the history of western though, or think it was completely rotten from the beginning, valuing only the philosophies of the 20th century. Also, if you think that divorce, abortion, casual sex and the LGBTQ phenomenon are positive developments, Mary Harrington's book, 'Feminism against progress' is great at dispelling such misconceptions.

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

@@marcuscrassus5229 Deduction from pure reason would tell you that the social realities you list are natural to human life. Divorce isn't desirable, but at times needful, especially in cases of abuse of any kind. This has been true through the ages in human relationships. As you know religious men have even said women who face abuse should stay no matter the harm. Overuse of divorce overuse is a symptom of our societies inability to to foster emotionally healthy citizens. Too much reliance on consumerism as a end-all, be-all. Abortion is obviously the same, and a common feature of humanity throughout time. Casual sex is no "development" in many societies and places it has been as prevalent as we see now. I would agree we are over sexualizing consumers, having nearly bare breasts in your face on magazine covers as you wait in line at the grocery store, is not desirable. LGBTQ people have been a feature of humanity through out time, they were just attacked and rejected. Now we have outgrown that very low level reasoning. What is really at play here is re-installing the old patriarchal, religious order using a facade of intellectual thought. Also, I can't see how you would imagine anything he said was Kantian.

[@walteryellow3884]

Like you guys KNOW you’re evil right? Like biblical Egyptian royalty evil?

[@rickvinson8324]

Religious fascists, for sure.

[@Scynthescizor]

How?

[@Saturday8pm]

Lulz … just because someone writes a best selling book doesn’t mean its contents make good politics. 🇺🇸

[@GS-vb3zn]

Deneen sounds suspiciously socialist… National Socialist.

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

Howso?

[@Saturday8pm]

… more like Christian Nationalist.

[@stephenpowstinger733]

The guy thinks all American right-wingers are Nazis.

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

@@stephenpowstinger733 I didn't get that at all, instead that right wing views like abortion rates, divorce rates and transgender rights are a sign of a negative shift, in fact in support of right wing views.

[@stephenpowstinger733]

In his new book Deneen argues his sophisticated view of political philosophy. It’s basically the same conservatism as developed by Burke, Buckley and others. Personally, I am more a libertarian because the religious conservatism of Deneen isn’t fair to women. They spend too much time on culture war and not enough on what’s happening in the world and the economy.

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

Women having the right and ability to divorce a violent or abusive partner is NOT a negative. Also, no one "celebrates" abortion, it's interesting that a modern academic believes sexuality should be relegated singularly to reproduction. Isn't a man dictating their values over a woman, removing her right to her own body a social regression?

[@oo3380]

Abortion is being celebrated, there were actions like shout out your abortion.

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

@@oo3380 have no doubt some women are happy they own their bodies, but no, no one celebrates having an abortion.

[@lisapalermo7130]

Easy No-Fault Divorce has been the worst thing for women and children. It allows upwardly mobile men to trade in their wife for a younger model just when their famile assets are growing leaving women at an older age with little or no wealth.

[@HopeForPeaceNow]

@@lisapalermo7130 Can you show that abused women aren't served well by it? Community property ensure property is split evenly.

[@Forester-]

Strengthing laws to limit divorce would not be towards the goal of keeping women, or men, from leaving abusive partners but from limiting or making it more difficult to remarry so that marriage is seen as a one time life long commitment. Marriage is for the benefit of the child and divorce is almost always a negative for the children involved.